Why adults choose CI's for their children

[shel90]

Because the child is still deaf. I know a little girl who is the same age as your daughter. She is implanted and goes to the same school my neice used to go to. I saw this child just recently. She was speaking and obviously very fluent in spoken English. Half way through, the child started to get tired and wanted to take off the CI. Her parents allowed this. I then got to witness this child very effortlessly switch from spoken English to signing with her parents. It was very obvious to me she was bi-lingual and had command of both sign and spoken language. Unfortunately, I know little sign, but they were able to tell me what was said, so I wasn't totally clueless as both the child and her parents were fluent in both languages.

I don't see why this can't happen for other deaf children. In my opinion, it can, but most parents choose either sign or spoken English as the mode of communication. :roll:

I love to see deaf children do that! Switch from one language to another. It is AWESOME!

 

[jillio]

I love to see deaf children do that! Switch from one language to another. It is AWESOME!

Agreed! It is awesome to watch, and a clear indication that those children are not "impaired" in any way, and in fact, are at a higher level cognitively than those who are not bilingual.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

I love to see deaf children do that! Switch from one language to another. It is AWESOME!

It was amazing to me, Shel.

 

[shel90]

I understand your point but to me the view on deafness as pathalogical or cultural is an overall view in which depending on which side you are on, may determine a holistic approach. I would say that people that view deafness as cultural would be more likley to take a holistic approach but that is not to say that people that choose a CI for their child wont take that same approach. It is possible to take a holistic approach even with a CI.

I agree and I have seen it with a lot of hearing families of children with CIs.

 

[Cloggy]

Because the child is still deaf. I know a little girl who is the same age as your daughter. She is implanted and goes to the same school my neice used to go to. I saw this child just recently. She was speaking and obviously very fluent in spoken English. Half way through, the child started to get tired and wanted to take off the CI. Her parents allowed this. I then got to witness this child very effortlessly switch from spoken English to signing with her parents. It was very obvious to me she was bi-lingual and had command of both sign and spoken language. Unfortunately, I know little sign, but they were able to tell me what was said, so I wasn't totally clueless as both the child and her parents were fluent in both languages.

I don't see why this can't happen for other deaf children. In my opinion, it can, but most parents choose either sign or spoken English as the mode of communication. :roll:

Couple of questions?
Did the child have 1 or 2 CI's.? (1 Ci makes hearing more tiresome than 2)
When did the child get CI.?(How big was her understanding of sign before)
How skilled were the parents when the child was born.?

If signlanguage is known from before, the parents would have no problem doing it.
If not, then signlanguage is a new language to learn. That is a lot of work, especially if you have to focus on speech separate from focusing on signlanguage.

In our case, Lotte stopped using sign herself. We used it longer than she did. And we did not continue because she allready learns Dutch and Norwegian... (and now, in school, english is started..)

 

[shel90]

How can they when the primary focus of CI is the ears and the mouth?

RD is right..we have families in our program whose primary focus arent on the ears and the mouth. I think those families' primary focuses are both things...their children having access to sound and their children have full access to a visual language as well.

 

[shel90]

Most that have also admitted to dropping sign language as soon as their child started learning to speak. :roll:

Again, why drop sign? The child is still deaf.

That is what I dont agree with. The dropping of signs.

 

[Cloggy]

I posted a reference to it in an earlier point. Do you know how to do a search?

Why am I not surprised?
Sure, I know all that....
However, You know the title, you have them in your IM-folder. You just don't want to share it....
Fine..

 

[Cloggy]

You asked for an explanation on how that was possible. This article explains it very well.

Well, you misinterpreted. That was regarding "loss of hearing". Not tinnitus..

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Agreed! It is awesome to watch, and a clear indication that those children are not "impaired" in any way, and in fact, are at a higher level cognitively than those who are not bilingual.

I believe that, too. This child is very bright. I have idea about when she was identified as deaf, but I am thinking early on. She obviously had a strong language base to build spoken language upon.

 

[Cloggy]

Agreed! It is awesome to watch, and a clear indication that those children are not "impaired" in any way, and in fact, are at a higher level cognitively than those who are not bilingual.

So you're saying that people that are not bilingual are dumber than people that are bilingual..
Can you elaborate on that.??

 

[jillio]

RD is right..we have families in our program whose primary focus arent on the ears and the mouth. I think those families' primary focuses are both things...their children having access to sound and their children have full access to a visual language as well.

I didn't mean to imply that all parent's didn't. In fact, there are a couple on this board with children with CIs that take a holistic approach. They are refreshing indeed. I wish there were more like them.

My only point was, if more were taking a holistic perspective, we wouldn't have so many deaf children with CIs being referred to deaf programs that are woefully behind in langauge because the past focus was on the child's ability to hear and speak.

 

[jillio]

So you're saying that people that are not bilingual are dumber than people that are bilingual..
Can you elaborate on that.??

I didn't say that at all. And I take great offense to your use of the word "dumb."

 

[shel90]

I didn't mean to imply that all parent's didn't. In fact, there are a couple on this board with children with CIs that take a holistic approach. They are refreshing indeed. I wish there were more like them.

My only point was, if more were taking a holistic perspective, we wouldn't have so many deaf children with CIs being referred to deaf programs that are woefully behind in langauge because the past focus was on the child's ability to hear and speak.

True..

 

[Cloggy]

Agreed! It is awesome to watch, and a clear indication that those children are not "impaired" in any way, and in fact, are at a higher level cognitively than those who are not bilingual.

So you're saying that people that are not bilingual are cognitively challenged compared to people that are bilingual..
Can you elaborate on that.??

 

[jillio]

So you're saying that people that are not bilingual are cognitively challenged compared to people that are bilingual..
Can you elaborate on that.??

Nor did I say that.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Couple of questions?
Did the child have 1 or 2 CI's.? (1 Ci makes hearing more tiresome than 2)
When did the child get CI.?(How big was her understanding of sign before)
How skilled were the parents when the child was born.?

If signlanguage is known from before, the parents would have no problem doing it.
If not, then signlanguage is a new language to learn. That is a lot of work, especially if you have to focus on speech separate from focusing on signlanguage.

In our case, Lotte stopped using sign herself. We used it longer than she did. And we did not continue because she allready learns Dutch and Norwegian... (and now, in school, english is started..)

1. Child was unilaterally implanted.

2. Child was implanted when she was a year old.

3. Parents signed with the child upon learning that she was deaf; early infancy.

4. I can't answer this as I don't know. To be fair, I'm not going to speculate.


Regardless, I find it absolutely a shame that a parent will not learn sign for their child simply because it's "hard". That's a cop out; an absolute cop out.

I also find it sad that parents don't continue signing with their deaf child, because the child is deaf. What happens when that child is confronted with a signer, but can not sign themselves? This is my point. You'll have a deaf child who cannot converse with a fellow deafie simply for lack of sign. I find that incredibly sad. Incredibly sad.

 

[rockdrummer]

Perhaps because the parent's assessment of benefit gained is quite different from the child's assessment of benefit gained.

I'm sorry but the benefits are not subjective. If the child is able to connect with the sounds around them and make use of those sounds then there is benefit. The happiness of the child is dependent on many other factors other than if they have a CI or not. :roll:

 

[Daredevel7]

Because the child is still deaf. I know a little girl who is the same age as your daughter. She is implanted and goes to the same school my neice used to go to. I saw this child just recently. She was speaking and obviously very fluent in spoken English. Half way through, the child started to get tired and wanted to take off the CI. Her parents allowed this. I then got to witness this child very effortlessly switch from spoken English to signing with her parents. It was very obvious to me she was bi-lingual and had command of both sign and spoken language. Unfortunately, I know little sign, but they were able to tell me what was said, so I wasn't totally clueless as both the child and her parents were fluent in both languages.

I find this child so awesome.

 

[Byrdie714]

There is no way someone notices a CI faster than they notice sign language. That is a bogus claim.

If you put a deaf child and a CI child in front of an indivdual that has never meet them before--they are going to notice the Ci child due to the wires protruding from the backs of the ears to the magnet.

Secondly when they see a deaf child signing--first reaction is, " Oh how cute!"

Why sign if the child insists on speaking/hearing?

Because you want to include all aspects of communication including sign even if the child insists on speaking/hearing.

That is the holistic approach. :roll:

I would be happy that she feels open enough with me to tell me what she feels and then I would never mention the implant again. I would be happy that I gave her the opportunity to make that choice, and not limit her in any way. I have given her the gift of access, nothing more. I am not taking away her ability to use ASL, or the Deaf community, or her school and friends. I am merely giving her access to sound, which she didn't have with her aids.

Tell me exactly how that is abusing her..

Good.

How is itdeemed "abuse"? Simple--the parent of the child isn't taking into consideration her well being just their's.